Either the community director or the TalkBoard of this year or next. Probably the CD since she has a more complete picture.
However the TalkBoard isn't approving expansion until after hearing from the CD and voting on a new proposal.
As to goalie's request for a time limit on the test I don't object to that if the other TalkBoard members prefer it that way.
goalie would you prefer a two phase test or a single trial by fire? I don't mind that two phases will take longer but i suppose there is entertainment value in a quick and spectacular failure.
Bolding mine: Does this mean that TalkBoard has already decided how to vote on this/is ready to approved this?
CMK10 I intend to poll TalkBoard members on each feature and put the most favored features together before voting on anything....
Could a poll be implemented here so that member opinions would be more clearly visible?
Originally Posted by
kipper
So, you don't have an idea of what qualifies as a success or a failure, nor do you have a metric that will define either? Speaking for the entire TalkBoard about approving or vetoing expansion is a little far-reaching, isn't it?
Again, so you don't have a plan for any of this?
^ Agreed on all points! and
bolding mine emphasis on the bolded part
No. Read the working draft. If approved in that form it puts TalkBoard on record as making no recommendation about wider use of reader feedback. In other words I am speaking of a proposal in which TalkBoard will speak for itself.
As to the the first part, TalkBoard
SHOULD be on on record as to "what comes next" be it shut it down, extend the trial period or close it down-Time to take some responsibility!
Originally Posted by
jackal
A TalkBoard member can't even throw out some draft ideas without being accused of trying to force his agenda on the TalkBoard?
...and people wonder why there's a private TalkBoard forum. No wonder some TalkBoard members prefer to hash out the rough ideas in there and then come out here with something more cohesive. It's less painful.
It's one thing to hold your representatives accountable. It's another to pointlessly assail them with pointed arrows.
Don't forget the slings to go with those arrows
. But seriously, and frankly, to me, it does come out that this agenda item
is being forced. Draft ideas are one thing, but afaic, not having a plan (and afaic, there isn't one) to go with the draft and simply "winging it" by thinking, "well, this looks like it won't fly, so I've changed it to this
and I think you'll like it*
*some of us have heard that one before
Originally Posted by
aBroadAbroad
Even if TB decides that a trial would be worthwhile, i don't think IB has yet indicated whether such functionality can be practically provided, and whether development and implementation would divert resources from other higher priority projects, such as a new mobile app.
Agreed ^ and if IB does say that this can be done, that needs to be shared here!
Originally Posted by
kipper
It seems the posts are split roughly 50-50, yet we've now seen a revised proposal, pushing this, even though there's not been a large clamoring for it.
^ Agreed!